F
Personally, i thought it was boring.
>use this thread to laugh at Neil Gaiman
 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
Sandman cancelled
F
Personally, i thought it was boring.
>use this thread to laugh at Neil Gaiman
|
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
So when can we except season 2, Gayman?
You lived long enough to see Neil Gaiman fighting with a brony.
What a time to be alive.
Why did it fail if it was the biggest TV show in the world during its run?
It's like picking a fight with a literal child, even if you 'win' you'll look worse than him.
>draws and writes
When was the most recent case of Mc Farlane actually drawing a comic and not just covers?
>It's like picking a fight with a literal child, even if you 'win' you'll look worse than him.
Yeah, the brony really should've picked a smarter opponent than Gaiman.
Blackrock is going to approve a second season just to dab on chuds, nevermind the ratings
Didn't Blackrock just lost like trillions of money recently?
Blackrock is a government arm now they can lose infinite amounts of money
it's not about money anon
it's about sending a message
What are trillions when you got a warehouse full of printers?
No it won't, even Blacrock knows when to fold
No they do not.
>all this woke stuff being cancelled/failing and never getting more support on Amazon, Netflix, HBO etc. unless it is a moneymaker (which they pretty much aren't)
>this is all a part of Blackrock's plan
???
It's not about the money. It's about sending a message. Literally. Blackrock has infinite money so they don't give a shit when the newest propaganda piece flops. They will just do it again.
>it's about sending a message that even normies are becoming increasingly more antagonist towards every passing day
I don't think they know what they're doing
that would be funny
Binge watching to get a season 2? At this time of year, in this day and age, across the country, localized entirely for your cheap Netflix show!?
>For the last two weeks I've had the biggest TV show in the world
>But now it's canceled
Also:
Lmao, these three old men were and are more popular than Gaiman's adaptation will ever be.
Would James May be a good Dream?
He's too old these days and keeps his beard grown out now, but a younger him probably could've been.
which are the best specials to check out
Botswana, Bolivia, and Burma
Rings of Power looks a bit off
>Lmao, these three old men were and are more popular than Gaiman's adaptation will ever be.
Amazing what you can do when you don't spend all your time simping for darkies
And then there's this moron.
Thanks to racetards like you, we can't say 'but why did Death have to be raceswapped, she looks nothing like her comic self' without Neil calling us all racists! Good job!
>it's our fault Neil white knights for dindus
They will never love him back
>These 3 get abused by the network and walk
>The entire fricking BBC falls off
Wild how much influence these guys held
>walk
more like Jeremy punched some gay that was working on the BBC that bothered him a lot and was kicked out, and the other 2 went with him after the suits forced them to "sanitize" their show
Neil Gaiman is hereby to be known as Kneel, Gay Man
Neil's right in that he's always been woke but he's wrong in trying to dunk on people who think the adaptations are inferior in every way. He's rich enough that he'll just cope his way past all criticism and deny the spiral.
>American Gods, 1 season
>Sandman, 1 season
>Good Omens, forgotten made for TV movie
Has he shot all his shots? I don't think he has anything left worth anything
it's because he doesn't understand woke. People don't like or enjoy performative bullshit. Changing a characters race to fit the character is fine but they don't do this. They don't do it because that actor is the best actor available but to fill a quota of some prescribed need. Fine and dandy but don't expect people to play along with it if they don't want to.
>it's because he doesn't understand woke. People don't like or enjoy performative bullshit.
I don't know why this hasn't gotten across the skulls of every executive in America. All everyone wants is for characters to be genuine and not a committee decision so rich people can pat themselves on the back for uplifting the PoCs
Ehhhh... I'm extremely skeptical that Thor was hurt by having a few black characters among the cast, nor making Tadanobu Asano play Hogun. The Daredevil show bulked up Karen Page's role and it didn't hurt to elevate a girl to a secondary character status. You can tweak a bit. These are often very old properties, a little creative casting or expanding a secondary character's role isn't automatically going to frick things up, and it's true that a more diverse cast of characters is often more likely to do well with 2020s audiences.
Here they went "frick it" and ignored half of the iconic visuals of the book. No you can't take the character that has by far the most iconic design (even moreso than Morpheus himself), completely toss that design in the trash, then go "what're you, racist?" when people call bullshit.
It's a cynical marketing strategy called Appeal to the Minority (not literal racial minority).
You can either take a gamble and appeal to everyone, or you can appeal to a demographic you haven't captured.
If 90% of your market is white and 10% is non-white, then you will lose only 2 or 3% of your white audience by appealing to the 10% of that missing market. Then if you figure in that appealing to that 10% black audience also gets you a 2 or 3% boost from woke white people and a bunch of free marketing from journalists and there's no downside to it.
Again, I think you're taking it to an extreme. Was Tadanobu Asano badly cast as Hogun? It was certainly unusual casting, not what you would've expected if you did a fancast a few years before the movie... but I'd still say it worked well enough. Slightly more diverse cast, while most of the key visuals were maintained. The more dreary costumes in the movie were a bigger loss.
Sandman's a much more extreme case, that at times did the visual equivalent of "Deadpool in Wolverine."
Hogun is a a relatively obscure Marvel character. So few of the people who watch the MCU know that Hogun exists and he has such a small impact on the story that it doesn't really register. Only fans would care, and it was such an inoffensive change it didn't matter. Hogun is an alien, his name kind of sounds like Shogun which is Japanese, Asano is Japanese; only a fan would care and even then they might just be happy to see the character exist on screen that they don't care that much.
If it's done well no one will care, but the type of people who have racial quotas have no interest in doing adaptations well or being genuine. They have a billion dollar industry to keep going. Blatant racial quotas can take people out of the experience but as long as it gets certain percentages in seats they'll keep doing it. Casting Sherlock Holmes as a black lesbian will happen eventually and it will happen because the executives want to appeal to the ideological / racial minority.
Taika Waititi really did look at Tadanobu Asano and say "really, who needs the Warriors Three? Kill them like b***hes."
Ragnarok was so damn wasteful.
All three should have died together, instead of the two white guys going down like b***hes.
Ragnarok was where I got off the MCU train, it was just THAT bad. Sunk cost is the only reason I even stayed in the theater until the end.
It's a stain on Assno's impressive filmography. Though to be fair he's only a kino machine when not working in Hollywood.
>They don't do it because that actor is the best actor available
This. Today I still haven't heard a single person complaining about Michael Clarke Duncan doing the Kingpin.
Probably helps he was the best part of a bad movie
Well you have now, because Kingpin is intelligent and sophisticated, Duncan played a dumb thug who killed his own bodyguard for lulz
>Duncan played a dumb thug who killed his own bodyguard for lulz
That is literally what Kingpin is
Absolutely not.
Yes he is
No, read some comics. Or even compare him to how Kingpin was in the Netflix series or the 90s Spider-Man cartoon.
Confirmed not having read any comics with Kingpin in them.
Name one (1) comic where Kingpin acts like a dumb thug and not a sophisticated high-class mastermind. Just because he can get angry and beat the shit out of people doesn't make him the equivalent of Duncan being in that mode throughout the entirety of his screentime.
Literally the biggest story he's ever been in, Born Again. Kills one of his underlings because he's angry.
And then he spends most of the story brooding and planning behind the scenes. Duncan's Fisk was all just muscle and bravado.
Not canon.
He does have Wesley as a subordinate in the Zdarsky run, though.
punisher max
He literally kills his subordinates and even innocent people at the drop of a hat for literally no reason in almost every story he's in. Comic Kingpin would never have a kino friend like Wesley from the Netflix series because he'd murder him for any number of moronic reasons.
Have you never read anything with Kingpin before?
>Kingpin is intelligent and sophisticated
lol, no he isn't.
Kingpin IS nothing more than a thug (Matt says as much) who got to where he is by being the biggest piece of shit imaginable. He even boasts about how he's 'far from reasonable' which as far as I'm concerned is basically walking around announcing HA! I'M EVIL! Seriously what a dogshit character, he's the worst thing about Daredevil and both Duncan and D'Onofrio elevated him more than he deserved.
As nitpicky as that is, Duncan didn't write the part. His performance was fine with the material he was given.
Kingpin effects the idea of a sophisticated persona but he has a hard time leaving his past in the past. it's a large part of his character, just like being a dumptruck is.
American gods was fricked because the executive meddling.
There’s always Anansi Boys if he ever wants to catch that BLM train, I guess. No idea how popular it actually is. It’s not hated from what I can tell, but it comes up less than fricking Neverwhere.
I’m still in awe of someone approving Electra slicing up her own sandbags while BRING ME TO LIFE played
What did he hope to gain by arguing with people on Twitter?
For the seethe to go away
Doesn't look like it worked
he hasn't written a real original book in 9 years
I guess when he doesn't have a TV job he's just terminally online instead
He's probably drunk. Hope he gets cancelled himself next
How does this idiot don't see the issue? It was always progressive, and now the fans of that progressive comic are calling out the wokeness.
Same case with star trek fans Was always diverse and progressive and no one had a problem, but dishonest SJWs won't acknowledge that wokeness is a whole different beast and that they're actively doing something wrong now
There is a difference from being a 60's prog and a tumblrite
It is broke now.
That's actually pretty clever.
Wokeness was not a thing until about 2015
This dumb frick doesn't know what woke even is
>Discworld went woke and fricking failed at its one shot at adapting City Watch
>now nobody will want to touch the franchise again
>Sandman goes woke and fails at its one shot at adaptation
>now nobody will want to touch the franchise again
Many many such cases!
That's 2.
And Discworld will get another shot.
But not The Watch, which Pratchett had been trying to get made since forever.
I'm skeptical. We may never get "The Watch: A TV Show" but I'm pretty okay with that. It was a concept with promise, but there were LOTS of ways for it to go wrong. But I'll eat my hat if we never get adaptations of individual Watch books.
I like Pratchett but it's hard for his works to be adapted. 90% of his books are witty narration and that doesn't translate to the screen
Going Postal solved it by just having a narrator.
The Sky1 movies did fine. It just requires writers with sovl to faithfully adapt the tone and realize they and their homosexual soapbox causes have no creative input of worth. They were also cast picture perfectly and only looked cheap, not shitty.
>The Sky1 movies did fine
They fricked up Maurice.
>Discworld went woke and fricking failed at its one shot at adapting City Watch
>Discworld went woke
>went
Black person discworld has been heavily into gender and race politics since fricking feet of clay and jingo. It's been woke since the mid nineties.
Discworld leaned left but it was usually very even-handed and never woke-scolded the audience, the antagonists in the more left wing stories were usually portrayed as more misguided than standins for Hitler. Also despite all that Vimes was racist and was one of the most popular characters.
>All media is leftist woke garbage except the ones I like, those have the exact same values but I like them so they're uhh..."even handed"
Are you the kind of moron that argues TNG is capitalist
I'm going to be honest, there is a difference between Secret Empire having a stand in for Richard Nixon and Modok Trump. You can do woke shit well, Aliens is literally a feminist movie where two female characters where two mothers battle over the fate of their children but it doesn't act cringey by making it blatant and highlighting it. The original Candyman was all about racial divisions and how intellectuals exploited the underclass while staying away from them. Like you can do woke shit without being BIGOT SANDWICH tiers of pandering and unsubtle. Also being fair TNG is weird because Gene had shown in TOS the Federation still used money and only in TNG did they go full post scarcity mode.
>no hitler
>no stalin
>tfw you will never be caught in a bigot sandwich ;_;
That's how it be bro, at least you'll always have Ukraine...
I think you're conflating rainbow Capitalism with actual progressive politics ideology
To be fair, that's kind of the purpose of rainbow capitalism
why is good writing seemingly an offensive alien concept to you commies?
went woke and fricking failed at its one shot at adapting City Watch
It didn't go woke. It got butchered so fricking hard Pratchett's daughter disowned it from the whole Discworld franchise
Would an accurate Death have made a difference?
I have no memory of what Netflix Death looks like, but I suspect there would have been a LOT of simping for a Death that looked like the one in the books.
Absolutely. Coomers keep the world spinning by coombingewatching, just look at GoT
maybe some but like 1 anon pointed out in another thread the entire thing was just beating the fans like a dead horse with nonstop blacks and gays.
You've got to know who your install base is and pivot towards them and hopefully rake in more along the way.
This was essentially putting Rupauls Drag Race on syfy channel and expecting a ratings blowout.
Nothing short of a rework from the ground up could have made it a good show.
Honestly? An accurate Death probably wouldn't save the show. It would just fly under the radar like most live action comic series and underperform quietly. The only difference is thst in our timeline it underperformed while shitting its pants and farting loudly in front of everyone, with the creator desperately damage controlling against everyone who pinches their nose in disgust.
I would have been fine with male non-black Constantine fricking dudes on screen
Death being black is simply the most notable frick up. It may have kept rating up for a little longer, but the rot would still be there, so the viewers still would have lost interest. For example, why is Dream not chalk white? Just being played by a white guy isn't enough, fricker needs to look like a ghost, not some loser you pulled off the street.
Grease paint and a decent wig was just a bridge too far.
I haven't watched the show, but can't Death look like basically whatever she wants? In that case, why not have like 3-4 "Death"s that cycle whenever she's off camera? Like first she's Black Death, then Sandman looks away for one reason or another, then when it cuts back to her she's goth Death, then something else. I wouldn't have cared about Black Death then since it would have just been another "outfit" for her.
Because then you end up doing it for all the endless and blowing up the budget. I think the only one consistent in appearance for humans is destiny and destruction.
Yes, oddly dream should had been slight CGI. Kinda like Enchantress from Suicide Squad.
don't underestimate the number of waifugays in the nerddom.
It would have been more popular if they didn't ruin the number one waifu.
Maybe. Other aside is not being woke.
lol no it wouldn't have, it was just easy to have some kind of drama around the show but it wouldnt have made a difference any others. People here were calling the northman the new coming of the christ with its all white cast in a viking setting, and how did it perform? barely made double its budget.
>most faithful adaptation
This feels like Mark Hamill saying how good The Last Jedi was, or Bill Murray praising Ghostbusters 2016
Where were you when Todd won?
Is todd even relevant? All I remember is that he lost a bunch of lawsuits.
He still has his own succesful toy company and Spawn is still runing, so I'll say yes.
Spawn was only good for a few arcs. Outside of the costume it's completely irrelevant. The toy company is much more impressive.
I haven't read Spawn in like 30 years but you are deluded, King Spawn sold astronomical numbers while the Big 2 are languishing
>King Spawn sold astronomical numbers while the Big 2 are languishing
Spawn sells as much as Big 2's biggest titles at best.
That's not how it works, lil buddy. Gaiman is still rich and successful too.
Todd lost a ton of money in the early 2000s but built a lot back and managed to get the DC toy license, and build it into a huge powerhouse in just two years. The guy is just a fairly smart entrepreneur.
I like thr Batman idea, though.
Palmer's finally dumped him, so no wonder wonder he's pushing for a second season so hard.
She dumped him because they had 2 kids and she no longer wanted an open relationship. It's weird that she was less of a freak than him.
Sandman has always been pretentious garbage.
Well deserved. Frick gaiman
Now send neilman go woke and broke tweet again.
>biggest tv show in the world
>beat out by some no name show about a female lawyer within a week
>so big that he has to go on twitter and beg people to rewatch it or finish watching it if they dropped it
Lesson number, like, 3 here is that the numbers put together by executives and committees are literally meaningless because they'll stretch and warp them any way they can to generate more hype. I'm sure some decades old telenovelas got more viewership than sandman did. It deserved its cancellation and Gaiman has a fraction of the respect he used to have for not only kowtowing to performative progressivism but being a whiny b***h about it very visibly.
Where is barneygay? My little pony, mlp, cheese, don turtelli
You know, all this Sandman threads barely talk about wherever or not the actual show is like the comic.
Literally just seething that it had black people in it.
>watch a show all at once
>"you watched it wrong! engagement dropped off!"
>space out watching a show so it seems like people are watching it for longer
>"you watch it wrong! there was no peak of engagement!"
Netflix is moronic for wanting instant success, trying to recapture the success of shows like Stranger Things which had a growing popularity with each new season.
I loved the Sandman comics but I wasn't a fan of the show. Gaiman's super-seething on twitter when the inevitable cancellation news comes out is gonna be fun to watch.
>Netflix is moronic for wanting instant success
If a show or movie cannot deliver instant success, then it has no business budgeting itself like a blockbuster.
An expensive flop is like a serious injury. It's going to be tended to very quickly because it might be lethal. A small scrape, we let it scab over by itself first. At $15 million per, The Sandman is probably a broken rib. Rings of Power, a stab wound to the neck.
>At $15 million per, The Sandman is probably a broken rib. Rings of Power, a stab wound to the neck.
I mean, isn't Rings of Power going to be spread out among 50 hours?
I assume the $1 billion budget is for the whole series, which would be $20-30 million per episode assuming they're all 1-1.5 hours.
Honestly, I'm still baffled that The Sandman cost $15 million per episode, it looks so cheap...
>I mean, isn't Rings of Power going to be spread out among 50 hours?
I think the billion plus figure is for the two seasons that they made concurrently. The first season is 465 million divided among 8 x 1 hour episodes, but on top of that is the 250 million licensing fee. If we are to tack that completely on first season, which might not be fair, that's 90 million per hour.
>I'm still baffled that The Sandman cost $15 million per episode, it looks so cheap
That's where cinematography and art direction comes in, I think. If any single aspect is weak, it brings the entire thing down.
Something I've learned watching all this stuff unfold with the Sandman (and the Little Mermaid, Resident Evil, Cowboy Bebop, Rings of Power, etc), is that apathy will never be an option for fans. Fans will either be the biggest evangelists or the biggest detractors. and there is no chill. So when someone makes an unfaithful adaptation and then blames toxicity for a poor reception, those complaints should always fall on deaf ears because that kind of enthusiasm is what they signed up for. It's baked into fandoms.
Mainstreaming cannot come at the expense of the fans, because they're going to make sure it doesn't work. Labeling what they do as toxic is as pointless as admonishing insurgents for using guerilla tactics. It's an asymmetrical war between people and major corporations. The people have every right to get nasty.
Apathy is what killed Cowboy Bebop. Maybe you cared so you followed all the discourse and interviews and shit, but most people ignored it and it got insta canceled. Very different from Sandman being spammed here and on Cinemaphile nonstop.
>Apathy is what killed Cowboy Bebop.
Apathy is what you get from the mainstream because the fans are out there being negative and anti-evangelical.
>Very different from Sandman being spammed here and on Cinemaphile nonstop
I think that's more a case of Cinemaphile being a tighter-run ship than Cinemaphile. I saw plenty of threads on Cinemaphile about Bebop, but because the negative opinion was so universal, there was no fighting. Everyone just pointed and laughed and had a good time.
>I saw plenty of threads on Cinemaphile about Bebop
Nowhere near as many as Sandman. Or She-Hulk, to use another recent example.
>Nowhere near as many as Sandman.
Sure, because Cowboy Bebop isn't really as big as those things. Even among the Japanese, it's sort of known as a cult classic, isn't it?
But my point still stands. Apathy from the mainstream is what kills all of these shows, and that's because the fans aren't evangelical when they're pissed. Sandman isn't being watched by the mainstream. Rings of Power is being ignored.
With the Sandman specifically, clearly its good performance during the first two weeks followed by a dropoff means that fans tuned in, then spread negative word of mouth. Gaiman is smart enough to understand this, so I can only take all of his current posts as denial.
Cowboy Bebop is definitely (far) bigger than She-Hulk at the very least.
People still meme that red headed NB tho. Ed, is it? Nobody posts about Sandman at all.
>Apathy is what you get from the mainstream because the fans are out there being negative and anti-evangelical.
This is what people really seem to have forgotten. You get Apathy when there's nobody being excited for the show. Who generates excitement? Hard-core fans.
Ya, the groups you're talking about not only arent capable of being apathetic, but they are also incapable of seeing any type of reaction outside of their bubble. The whole 'Rings of power gunna be bad' discourse got kneecapped when it released because most people didn't agree with that assessment, but the ardent are still proceeding as if 'its dogshit and everyone knows it'. In a similar manner, Live Action Bebop garnered the general consensus that it wasn't actually terrible, it just wasn't what you might have desired.
The funny thing about calling it asymmetrical war is that it still describes this, just not in the way you think. A bunch of people shooting at air can also be considered 'asymmetrical war' lol.
It's just the exact thing MGS2 talked about.
Facts are meaningless, what matters is the context that is built for you.
>Rings of Power GOOD
>Cowboy Bebop GOOD
Please complete the trifecta and tell us how good Resident Evil was too.
Please get off your rocker and tell me where I said either of those were GOOD. This predictable reaction is part of the problem, and is exactly what the other anon is talking about. Its either GOOD or BAD with fans and theres no in between, and to my point, said fans cant even conceive of an inbetween. What your responding to NEVER mentioned EITHER of those being GOOD. It just said that they WERENT BAD. These are not the same thing and you should take a step back to consider that.
>It just said that they WERENT BAD.
But they were bad. Extremely bad in the case of RE. Calling a spade a spade is what it is.
Resident Evil is only mentioned in this reply thread by you. If you want to go bag RE go make a thread about it elsewhere instead of moving goalposts on other subjects.
The point is you're attempting to deal in objective truth with something that is inherently subjective. You're refusing to accept that other people have other views. Please realize that, especially in the case of something like Rings of Power, you are in the minority in thinking that its bad.
OK shill
>Posts evidence of being in a bubble
>Doesnt even realize it
Theres a reason there's a difference between the critic and user scores there, anon. I dare you to post a screenshot of the Amazon reviews, where it clearly shows the majority rating it 7+ and a bunch of weirdos, a lot of them but still a minority, rating it 0.
Oh wait here I'll post one for you
>Critic reviews GOOD
>user reviews BAAAAD
.5 Bezos Bucks have been deposited into your account
Dude posted a screenshot of USER REVIEWS that support his view, dunno what more you want from him
>i dare you to post the reviews the company making the show can curate and alter themselves
LOL
O
L
That screenshot is from before they started moderating those reviews, not that you'd want to admit that.
>you
>he didn't notice the ip count go up when i posted
I literally just got to this thread.
Good thing I didn't address you as if you had been part of the conversation then, or that your prior participation (or lack thereof) is somehow relevant to the point at hand
Amazon got caught deleting user reviews
See
These are things that you can verify yourself, not that you will because they dont support your view.
>every negative review is disingenuous, that's why they're paragraphs long
>every positive review is legitimate fan interaction, that's why they're short and in broken engrish with repeated key search terms brand wants to promote
Rings of power is so offensively bad and it's coming at such a bad time economically people will feel morally vindicated in dumping their prime membership while pretending it isn't to save $200 because inflation is raping them.
>Am I out of touch?
>No, its the positive reviews that are wrong!
I'll take the goalpost movement (relative to the conversation at hand) as an admission of defeat.
>heh reviews are 50-40 one word and positive vs detailed overwhelmingly negative? You see that means the show is well loved, popular, and uncontentious
>negative reviews are just review bombing so we can delete them, positive reviews posted by bots are an anti semetic conspiracy theory because you hate Black folk and women and stuff (All according to kekaku)
>Heh, Forbes? You need a bigger outlet than that sweety demrangz.blogspot.com says the Galadriel 15 on one bollywood fight scene was stunning and brave
Bezos is going to short your check
You think a 3.3 average is good? for a billion dollar show? it should be in the fricking stratosphere in terms of reviews to justify it
>especially in the case of something like Rings of Power,
Black person, even the HUFFINGTON Post and Entertainment Weekly took a shit on Rings of Power before it even started releasing, and many other publications since then have done the same. This is one of the few times even the access shill media can't defend garbage.
Dog, the critical consensus isn't negative. You can't cherry pick random outlets and act like they're representative. Because then I can just cherry pick other outlets and be like 'nuh uh'. Its stupid. I hope you see how thats stupid.
Yo, das rite *hand sign* yo biznitch black lives matter!
You're right, he should stop replying to you on twitter
Look, I've been where you are. You're a teenager or college kid with no sense of scale or priority.
It's not your fault, it's your brain's.
is Rings of Power really the hill you are intent to die upon
Uwotm8?
Cowboy Bebop got spammed ALL OVER Cinemaphile, because it was so hilariously shit.
The same thing happened with that awful Death Note movie.
It also helps that anime fans tend to be far less forgiving towards shit adaptations (especially when made by Americans who clearly had no love for the original) than comic fans do.
Cinemaphile is not real life
Not as much as Sandman and the threads didn't get nearly as many replies.
Ufrickingwotm8?
You clearly don't actually browse Cinemaphile, Cowboy Bebop threads got FAAAR more posts than Sandman threads.
Nah
>um actually it's okay to be a massive homosexual on social media because I'm an underdog
Okay, but you're still a massive homosexual.
Gaiman let's Netflix frick with his Magnum Opus
Gaiman also let his wife Palmer to frick everyone else.
I think gaiman lost something during the 90s. This fricking guy holy shit.
The man has definitely gone the way of Kevin Smith. Someone who was great at writing and directing and crafting a fun story in the 90s. But he's old now, lost his touch, and cannot make anything that is not just awful. His muse is long gone and now just argues with nobodies on twitter all day.
whatever they had back then, they definitely don't have it now.
neil used to a nice, gentle bloke. what happened to him?
divorce and women, same happened to Brendan Fraser but he went into depression mode instead of nuclear butthole rage mode.
And Brendan was Chad enough to get out from It.
PRESS S TO SPIT
Gaiman? More like Gay-man amirite fellas?
>I love Sandman!
>That's why I hate Gaiman and am glad it got no season 2!
I'm all for calling out people acting pretentious on the internet but at this point you fricks are more disingenuous and pretentious than your targets.
Stop letting obvious racists on one side and obvious marketers on the other lead you by the nose
Anon, are you stupid?
I love Ghost in the Shell, but that doesn't mean I think that abortion SAC 2045 is anything but garbage.
I'm glad it got reamed and frankly I'm hoping that it never gets another season and is silently swept under the rug like it deserves.
Learn the difference between a fan and a brand dicksucker.
A fan doesn't like the shit they like unconditionally just because it has [brand] or [creator] attached, that's what a fricking brand dicksucker does.
That you'd even compare this to the GITS Johansen movie tells me you haven't seen it and have nothing of value to add.
>Learn the difference between a fan and a brand
Unironically no u
>That you'd even compare this to the GITS Johansen movie
Are you moronic?
I'm talking about the original GiTS movie you dumbfrick, and the original SAC series compared to the most recent abortion series (not Arise).
Do you even know what SAC 2045 is?
My apologies, I kind of assumed you were talking about the movie that recast major as a white girl because why the frick would you bring up a low budget children's animated adaptation from a dying part of Netflix to talk about Sandman?
I overestimated your ability to stay even remotely on topic
Am I being trolled or are you just a complete fricking moron?
The point is that SAC 2045 is a shitty addition to GitS, by your logic a "fan" should like that abortion just because it has GitS attached to it.
That's not what an actual fan does, that's, again, what a fricking corporate brand dicksucker such as yourself does.
morons like you are why most Cinemaphile media is dogshit, you think it's more important to support [brand] than for the media created to actually be good or at least respect the source material.
>by your logic a "fan" should like that abortion just because it has GitS attached to it.
Cool strawman bruv
If you have to go that far out of your way to avoid what I'm saying then I've already won
>Cool strawman bruv
>>I love Sandman!
>>That's why I hate Gaiman and am glad it got no season 2!
That is literally what you implied in your original post.
Like no shit someone who likes the source material wouldn't want to see more of an adaptation they dislike of that material.
Do you not know what a fricking fan is?
Take your dumb ass back to Twitter, m8.
>That's what you implied
Black person you literally reposted my statement
>A fan of Sandman wouldn't hate Gaiman and wish him a pox
Is not a grand statement, anon.
You're so insistent on these private definitions you've built and this little crusade against "brands"
It's kind of embarrassing, but that won't register for you until your frontal lobe finishes
Enjoy being a "fan" that hates what he loves
>>A fan of Sandman wouldn't hate Gaiman and wish him a pox
Sure they would, if they think Gaiman is fricking up the source material.
Your issue is that you don't seem to understand what a fan is, you seem to think it's synonymous with "dicksucker who praises everything made by a person who made something they like."
Which tells me that you should really frick off back to Twitter where you belong.
Being a fan of Sandman != being a fan of Gaiman.
>I'm a fan of a guy!
>I dislike his adaptation of his work!
>I'll insult him like a crybaby moron instead of expressing my opinions like an adult!
The fact that you call him Twittergay without thinking to call him a crybaby is like calling him wet without thinking to get out of the stream yourself. Maybe you could go back too, argue in peace, and leave this cancerous thread can die.
>>I'm a fan of a guy!
And that is what you are not understanding, people are not a fan of "a guy," they're a fan of "a work made by [guy]."
I don't know how this is so difficult for you to understand, unless you're just actually fricking moronic.
>>I'll insult him like a crybaby moron instead of expressing my opinions like an adult!
Please point to where I did that regarding Gaiman.
Unless you think I'm OP, in which case you really are moronic and should frick off back to Twitter where you belong.
I was talking about OP's twitter guy, and other people who do that kind of stupid, rude behaviour; and how you seem it think it's okay because you can't distinguish.
If he'd asked 'but you said here that those changes are going to annoy fans?' which is more polite than he might have actually responded without sarcasm and explained what he thought was the difference.
I would imagine that one part of being a fan of something involves having some like for the creator unless they're a pedo or something. Or at least some basic respect for the world he created. I once met James May. He was bloody rude. But I still have some basic respect for him for the years of Top Gear. Neil, here, was just minding his own business until a horsefricker - and worse, a barbiegay - came rolling up and started throwing a tantrum.
One can agree with the twittergay without condoning the behaviour of the twittergay.
>I would imagine that one part of being a fan of something involves having some like for the creator unless they're a pedo or something.
Unless of course that creator starts doing things that go against what they originally said/did that made you like them to begin with.
You wouldn't be this fricking obtuse and act like you don't understand the point if we were talking about a punk rock musician who suddenly became a bootlicking corporate shill or a pop star who turned into a conspiracy nut and started going on about vaccines and chemicals in the water turning everyone gay, you'd have no issues with people going "Yea, I used to be a fan of this person, but they've become kind of a c**t in recent years, so I'm no longer really a fan of them, but I do still like their older music."
Your problem is that you're a disingenuous little fricknugget so you will pretend that you don't understand WHY this is happening with Gaiman and WHY Twittergays are acting the way they are towards him.
Really? I'm being disingenuous? LOL. Yeah, some of the changes annoyed me. But there's being annoyed and then there's being a pissy crybaby like twittergay. And being disingenuous? How about comparing apparent hypocrisy with corporate shilling and supporting lunatics!
>shoddy raceswaps and costuming that Neil chose himself
>punk rocker starts shilling for Shell and saying Ukraine had it coming
And that's just it. I understand why the Twittergays are acting this way. Because, like you, they have no sense of proportion and just see a creator as someone to give THEM validation with their work, and use 'failure' of this to justify being a pissy crybaby. Just as bad as the woketards who say his trans character is transphobic because she died. Your opinion is valid. You are an invalid
And just to clarify; this guy hates bad adaptations of things he likes, but likes Equestria Girls, which is not just a bad adaptation, but a rehash masquerading as something new. Let that sink in. I'm not going to do what Neil did, and accuse him of being a racist, just because he complains about 'forced diversity', but if he likes some woke hack job that decided humans needed to be represented in a historical Equestrian docudrama as well then he's a hypocrite. If Neil spent all day dealing with idiots like that he'd be sarcastic too. It's annoying, but I'm not surprised.
Now go back to your creche.
TLDR have some basic empathy for the creator for the thing you liked even if the changes annoy you and act like an adult when talking to him. It's not hard. You make fun of the horsefrickers for autism but you condone the same behaviour.
>TLDR have some basic empathy for the creator for the thing you liked
I don't really care if the creator of a thing I liked is comfortable or happy if said creator has become a c**t that I don't like over the years.
That's the point you're not understanding.
I'm sure it's very annoying dealing with morons on Twitter, but you know a very simple way to fix that?
Fricking stop using Twitter and stop being such a terminally-online moron, a fricking mid-50s man shouldn't be getting into Twitter spats with autistic bronies.
>And being disingenuous? How about comparing apparent hypocrisy with corporate shilling and supporting lunatics!
The point is that the person who built their fanbase on being punk rock becomes a hypocrite when they become a corporate shill, I'm not surprised that you missed the point this hard since you seem like a moron.
The issue IS hypocrisy, it's always hypocrisy, people would also come out of the woodwork to shit on Gaiman if he suddenly came out as anti-piracy despite advocating for its uses a decade ago.
I know, I read the post. I will now clarify despite your clearly condescending and upset tone.
The difference is, there's dunking on someone for being a major hypocrite like that which goes against their ideals in a serious way that has an impact on the real world and promotes massive authoritarian bastards e.g. large corporations.
Then there's saying 'massive changes to a work will annoy the fans, I get it' while making noticeable changes that are still quite minor.
One warrants severe anger. The other warrants a groan.
The point I'm making here is that he's not being a c**t. He's being a bit childish, but that's not the same as being a c**t. Get some sense of proportion, Anon.
And I agree with the spoilered bit, but you should take a leaf out of your own book and stop condoning either party's autisting. You humans don't know how lucky you have it. It could've been far, far worse!
And TLDR if people think he's a corporate bootlicker now, then I trust they would've come out and called him that at the start when he began working with Amazon to begin with, considering how they treat their workers...
>One warrants severe anger. The other warrants a groan.
Right, and whining on Twitter is not severe anger, it's the internet equivalent of a groan.
I would agree with you if people were showing up to Gaiman's house threatening him or trying to drum up some kind of protest in his neighborhood because he dared make Death black, but that's not what's happening, you're trying to pretend that some teenagers and idiots b***hing on the internet is bigger than it actually is.
>The point I'm making here is that he's not being a c**t. He's being a bit childish, but that's not the same as being a c**t. Get some sense of proportion, Anon.
By doing damage control for Netflix (a giant corpo) he becomes a c**t.
I don't use Twitter, moron.
If he had a sense of proprtion, he wouldn't be a crybaby. He'd voice the opinion politely like an adult when they express their displeasure.
If he's doing damage control, it's for his own purposes, not for Netflix. Have you considered that possibility? It seems like any sort of self defencse can be written off as damage control if you look at it the right way.
He's being childish. Being a c**t would involve him losing his temper at the least, and/or a corpo that's done some very nasty shit. What has Netflix done?
>If he's doing damage control, it's for his own purposes, not for Netflix. Have you considered that possibility?
Of course, he's trying to save his own skin while simultaneously doing damage control for Netflix.
The smart thing to do would be fricking ignoring the morons on Twitter, but as we've already established, Neil is far too childish for that.
>What has Netflix done?
Netflix has shown themselves to be generally anti-consumer, goes out of their way to throttle specific connections, and continually raises their prices to an unnecessary level because, like most corpos, they have greedy as frick shareholders to please.
No publicly-traded company will ever be anything but a greedy corpo shitheel.
How is he trying to do damage control for Nutflix? How can you tell that's his motive? There's not much to go on. What is he specifically trying to do amage control for them for? The throttling, pricejacking, what?
Or did you even care about that when he signed up with them?
>How is he trying to do damage control for Nutflix?
By telling people to go bingewatch his show to please the Netflix algorithm.
>How can you tell that's his motive?
Because if it wasn't he would just say "We made a great show called The Sandman, you should go watch it" instead of begging people to binge it so Netflix will give him more money for another season.
>What is he specifically trying to do amage control for them for?
Not much besides posting on Twitter, which is typical of most western creators nowadays.
>Or did you even care about that when he signed up with them?
I knew it was going to be compromised as soon as he signed with Netflix.
They have a track record for making subpar originals.
>By telling people to go bingewatch his show to please the Netflix algorithm.
So he's doing damage control for a corp by telling people to watch his show because he wants it to do well so he gets a second season?
>Because if it wasn't he would just say "We made a great show called The Sandman, you should go watch it" instead of begging people to binge it so Netflix will give him more money for another season.
And you can tell his motive is damage control because he's ... telling people to watch his show because he wants it to do well so he gets a second season?
He's telling people to watch it so it does well in order to damage control by telling people to watch it so he does well? homie, you're only repeating yourself, it's a statement of the bleedin' obvious, and you ARE AWARE that his no choice in trying to please the algorithm as it's the only way their ratings bullshit works? He's probably aware it's bollocks!
>Not much besides posting on Twitter, which is typical of most western creators nowadays.
No, I'm asking which of Netflix's evil corporate deeds he was damage controlling for.
>I knew it was going to be compromised as soon as he signed with Netflix.
And here I'm asking why you didn't care about the fact he'd signed up with an evil company doing evil things at the start, if you have corporatism.
Now you're the one being obtuse!
>So he's doing damage control for a corp by telling people to watch his show because he wants it to do well so he gets a second season?
He's doing damage control by telling people to appease Netflix's algorithm.
>you ARE AWARE that his no choice in trying to please the algorithm as it's the only way their ratings bullshit works? He's probably aware it's bollocks!
Right, which is why begging randos on Twitter to watch it "the right way" to please the algorithm is damage control.
>And here I'm asking why you didn't care about the fact he'd signed up with an evil company doing evil things at the start
I did, like I said, I knew it was going to have the Netflix stink from day one.
I pirate everything Netflix puts out, even stuff I actually like like Cyberpunk Edgerunners, since Netflix is a disease and I will never give them my money or my views.
I think you are severely overthinking this with Neil tbh.
>You don't understand, a fan is someone that hates everything but a single aspect of one piece of an author's work and goes out of his way to denigrate and berate the things they claim to like!
That's not a fan, that's a schizo autist.
>No no, see, fans like everything unconditionally, they would never dare criticize anything made by or attached to their idol
I'm starting to understand why pic related is a thing.
The issue is, how likely is the CREATOR going to frick up the sauce material? He could, but making some changes that affect some things is less likely to ruon it when it's the creator, and in Neil's case he's been quite protective of Sandman over the years. It's one thing to be cautious. It's another to catastrophize. That wouldn't happen if OP and a lot of people in here touched grass. Even /b/ aren't like this.
The issue is also good faith vs bad faith
I can't see any argument against the actress that plays death as being in good faith if that person ignores the giant glaring terrible miscasting of Rose. Not on racial merits - the girl either can't act or was directed wrong as a joke and it's far and away the most glaring problem
Oh so you saw the weak bait but still bit? Idiot.
>TWAS MERELY AN ACT
Yeah, and you fell for it. You can make a case that pretending to be moronic is still moronic and I'd agree but you're still a moronic for biting. In short, you're both morons.
As if the major being played by a white woman was the biggest or only problem. You're like the moronic waifu gays making it all about black death when the show has that hammy b***h as Lucifer and the wife murderer as Matthew.
>Trying to bring up actual problems with the sandman adaptation
>Doesn't bring up the actress that played Rose
This is how I know you're both disingenuous c**ts, because no human being with eyes and ears could watch this series an critique it and not immediately focus on her horrible shit acting bringing the latter half down.
I didn't watch this shit, but even without that I can criticize the shit casting like Lucifer or Matthew, the Constantine change, the promo pics making it look cheap or the fact that they couldn't even bother getting Dream's hair right or Death's eye makeup. These are the bare minimum and they couldn't even muster a tiny bit of interest.
Anyone that calls themselves a "fan" of anything is a huge homosexual
Doubly so if they use that label to justify hissy fits.
Sounds like something a brand dicksucker would say.
It's ok, Iron Man, don't cry
Baby want baba?
/co/?
>headcanon
>muh wacism
Babby mad people being mean on the internet
I didn't watch it cuz I knew they qould frick up Bastet. I watched an ad for the show and saw some man-faced woman or troony on a bed trying to lool seductive and was like "thought so". There's a show called Dollface about a neurotic single woman who has an imaginary cat-headed lady as a life guide and it looks great. You're telling me something connected to Marvel can't afford that or better?
This is the only SandMANN that matters anyway.
>homies ITT even caring about Rings of Power much less watching it or raging about it
I'm not calling you moronic homosexual normies because rings of power is good or bad, but because anyone that really cares about LOTR media after Peter Jackson took a big fat 9 hour cinematic shit is someone without any taste or brains whatsoever.
Every time I see these threads I think it’ll have actual news and it’s always some random screencap of his twitter
It will never not make me laugh that of all people, Neil Gaiman's shit can barely make it a season without getting canned, but fricking GARTH ENNIS of all people had one of his most infamous comics get multiple seasons, even if they did have to heavily change it. Crossed also got made into a movie, though its not called Crossed and Ennis was not involved.
>try so much harder
That alone is a definite thin skinned
>self defense is bad!
>I'll say he's being childish simply for responding to look morally superior!
Yes, and fanatics, when they don't get what they want, may boil over if they have anger issues into attacking the corpo. Like fanatical fans of a thing when the adaptation isn't PERFECT to THEIR expectations!
>Pink News articles complaining that a superhero show with the characters made into lesbians being cancelled is proof Netflix hates lesbians
>People saying that death being changed to black is proof that Neil Gaiman is a dirty israelite who hates white people and makes propaganda
Both are insufferable fanatics on the level of Comic Book Guy. Twittergay and OP fall into category two.
For parity, so you don't think I'm biased, there's group three, and all there are on the BAW Bandwagon, which is filled with sad, lonely fools who think of ways to try and take people down on Twitter. Don't be one of them.
>People in the middle who try to spin a voluntary job role at an event his ex wife work at as proof he's an exploitative capitalist
>Yes, and fanatics, when they don't get what they want, may boil over if they have anger issues into attacking the corpo.
No, actual fanatics are the ones who take offense when [brand] is "attacked" by people who say they think it sucks and feel the need to go on tirades defending [brand] like someone just insulted their mother.
I'm talking about the ones who have anger issues and have high expectations, and become disillusioned very quickly when something isn't perfect. You're talking about the ones with low expectations.
>A fan of Sandman wouldn't hate Gaiman and wish him a pox
Gaiman only used Kirby ideas about a Gardner Fox character.
I was more mad about Johanna Constantine than black Death
I have a question: Does the creator basically lose the "word of god" thing when the work is completed and absorbed by the audience?
This depends on whether you feel "god" should have the power to rewrite history. But as a practical matter, if a creator were do make changes after the fact, then the audience can and will reassess their feelings about the work. So the problem isn't really whether Gaiman can change his story, but his expectation that fans are obligated to continue being fans. It's a different thing. He may own his work, but the audience owns their relationship to the work.
>not relaitively minor ones
Completely destroying all the poignant and interesting visuals and their accompanying themes of your original work to cheaply cash in while hoping diversity points shield you from criticism isn't a minor change.
Guess Gayman should have given a shit what his fans had to say rather than pissing on them.
Kneel Gayman
Good, frick that old bong sellout
Even if controversial in casting I thought it was pretty good. But really, what's the point at all of watching any Netflix shows when they're going to cancel anyway?
The Dark Crystal was fricking stellar and they cancelled it too.
This can't be healthy for the man. I quite enjoyed The Graveyard Book. I hope he moves onto new opportunities.
Frick you, Gaiman, you piece of shit. "You'll have to try so much harder"? Right, thats what Netflix said to you lmao try harder
Really Black representativo is a mistake, they should remplace the Black pushing for hispánic pushing, that Way a lot more of whitepasing characters can be added. Beside Black people look ugly as frick.
Why is he wasting his time trying to show off his super successful big boy pants to a literal who on twitter? How is he not embarrassed about this in every way?
>Sandman is good!
>Stop reading old European comics and cape shit
A fun TV show and Movie for Tin-Tin Chads.
>seething so hard he responds to all that
Leftoids really are having a melty over this aren't they lmao